Blog Stats

Flag Counter since 20091011

Hit Count Since 20110428

Archive for May, 2009

Michelle Malkin gave me the idea for this post and some inspiration toward my research. But she didn’t know she did it, so everything that comes after this shameless faux-praise of her website (you can find here) can officially be declared unknown to her… because she really unknowns it. 😉 And, for the record, I am not registered to comment on her site because I refuse to register to comment anywhere. If it takes a registration to comment somewhere… nemind, not important.

I found out yesterday that three members of ACORN in Nevada have been indicted for voter fraud. Along with those three members of ACORN, one of which was a regional director-type person, ACORN itself was indicted. The amount of fraudulant voter registrations for these three people is astronomical. The New York Times, hardly a conservative newspaper, reported out of 91,002 voter registration forms for Clark County, Nevada, only 23,186 turned out to be valid. That means barely over one out of four forms in a single county in Nevada was legitimate. Just think about the national ramifications of that. If that’s what was found in just one county of one state, how much fraud went unnoticed in all the other counties of that state? How much fraud went unnoticed in all the other states? And how can that kind of fraud not affect statewide and nationwide votes, let alone county-wide and precinct-specific vote counts?

Of course, ACORN claims it was not an organizational problem, but a case of a few bad apples. Allahpundit at Hot Air has Glenn Beck’s interview with an ACORN national spokesdummy making just that claim. And Beck does not let the spokesdummy off the hook during the entire interview. The spokesdummy makes an utter fool of himself. But I guess that is normal. Allahpundit said, “I understand why they continue to book him — angering the host is great for ratings — but why, given his astounding Edwards-esque unctuousness, does ACORN continue to send him as their rep? It’s practically an exercise in self-sabotage. I’m sitting here numb with horror at the possibility that he might be the most likable guy they have.” (emphasis Allahpundit’s)

The best part of the interview was, unfortunately, off-air. The spokesdummy asked Beck why Beck was afraid of black people. Yes, you read correctly, the absolute idiot went straight to the absolutely idiotic race-baiting hatred the liberal idiots are well-known to commit. Beck, in a rage, threw the brain-dead ACORN-paid vote-whore off his set.

I strongly suggest reading Allahpundit’s article, and following the links there.

So, less than a week before the midterm elections, four workers from Acorn, the liberal activist group that has registered millions of voters, have been indicted by a federal grand jury for submitting false voter registration forms to the Kansas City, Missouri, election board. But hey, who needs voter ID laws?

We wish this were an aberration, but allegations of fraud have tainted Acorn voter drives across the country. Acorn workers have been convicted in Wisconsin and Colorado, and investigations are still under way in Ohio, Tennessee and Pennsylvania.

The good news for anyone who cares about voter integrity is that the Justice Department finally seems poised to connect these dots instead of dismissing such revelations as the work of a few yahoos. After the federal indictments were handed up in Kansas City this week, the U.S. Attorney’s office said in a statement that “This national investigation is very much ongoing.”

Let’s hope so. Acorn officials bill themselves as nonpartisan community organizers merely interested in giving a voice to minorities and the poor. In reality, Acorn is a union-backed, multimillion-dollar outfit that uses intimidation and other tactics to push for higher minimum wage mandates and to trash Wal-Mart and other non-union companies.

As everyone can attest, ACORN has not been stopped from its fraudulent and highly illegal actions to corrupt local, statewide and national elections. Even though it was obvious in 2006 that ACORN was deeply involved in criminal activities. A few rogue employees, eh? High moral standing, eh? I’ll buy that for a dollar!

8 OCT 2008

Michelle Malkin reports likely voter fraud in Missouri, Connecticut, Wisconsin, my state of Ohio and Indiana. Indiana interests me, where 105 percent of Indianapolis residents aged 18 and over are registered to vote. Did you see that? Let me explain more clearly. Out of every 20 people old enough to vote in Indianapolis, 21 are registered. Out of 20, 21 are registered. You just pumped 21 gallons of gasoline in your 20 gallon tank. Or maybe not. Maybe you pumped 1 gallon onto the ground. But there was 1 extra voter out of every 20 voting-age person in Indianapolis.

Quite clearly, it is impossible to have 21 registrations for every 20 eligible. That’s obvious. That’s an obvious 5 percent over-registration. How much of that over-registration used that extra vote? But wait, that’s not all! (to borrow from every late-night TV ad) No district ever gets all eligible voters to register, with the exception of that little hole in New Hampshire. And definitely not everyone in a region with one thousand or more voting-age citizens. So, Indianapolis, with several hundred thousand residents, meaning over one hundred thousand voting-age residents, has every voting-age resident registered to vote? Impossible. 105 percent? Since anything over 100 percent is physically impossible and anything nearing 100 percent is actually impossible… You tell me. Did ACORN involve itself in a metro-area voter fraud-type activity?

What about the other states? All that evidence of people tied to ACORN involved in illegal election fraud. But it’s not ACORN but a few rogue employees of ACORN. That’s their claim.

the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or Acorn, acknowledged cases where canvassers submitted false or duplicate registrations, but said they represented only a tiny fraction of the 1.3 million new voters the group signed up during this election cycle.

“Out of 13,000 workers there were inevitably a few who decided they’d pad their hours by duplicating a card and filling out another one or making up a name,” said Kevin Whalen, an Acorn spokesman.

“If we discovered this,” he said, “we not only turned that information over but turned the information we had about that former employee — because they’d been fired by that point — to elections officials and asked for their help in prosecuting that person.”

On Tuesday, Acorn was surveying local offices to come up with a tally of the number of “problematic” registration cards it had submitted to states. A spokesman for the group indicated that the number of employees who had been fired for job-related problems could reach 1,000 or more nationwide, but later backed off that estimate. The spokesman confirmed that more than 100 Acorn workers in Ohio and Michigan had been fired.

So, what is “a few” and who decides?

Remember the above Wall Street Journal report. Remember what you read when you went to that site. Forget all that R. Kelly stuff you were pumped full of in the mainstream media and remember what the mainstream media didn’t bother to remind you of.

Looking at the quick math above, out of 13,000 ACORN employees, 100 in Ohio and Michigan were fired for, let’s be plain here, federal law violations. They were fired for ILLEGAL activities regarding FEDERAL VOTER FRAUD. And that is a crime. But, back to the math, quickly, that means 260 ACORN employees were in each state, or 520 in ohio and Michigan combined. And if 100 out of roughlhy 520 were fired for voter fraud, that means nearly 20 percent of ACORN in Ohio and Michigan combined were engaged in Voter registration fraud. How many actually fraudulently voted in those two states alone?

2/3 of all Clark County Nevada voter registrations were fraudulent. 1/5 of all Ohio and Michigan ACORN voter registrations were fraudulent. ACORN in Washington paid a six digit fine for voter fraud.

The Columbus (Ohio) Dispath said, recently:

A Franklin County judge told three out-of-state campaigners for Barack Obama who voted here illegally that they should have known better.

The three chose Ohio over their home states — where Obama was likely to win — because they wanted to swing the Electoral College vote toward their candidate, Common Pleas Judge Charles A. Schneider said.

He ordered a year’s probation, a $1,000 fine and a 60-day suspended jail sentence for Daniel “Tate” Hausman, 32, and Amy Little, 50, both of New York, and Yolanda Hippensteele, 30, of California.

All were paid staff members for Vote Today Ohio, an independent get-out-the-vote organization supporting the Democratic presidential candidate.

So much for a legitimate 2008 election. And so much for the mainstream media finding this out. And so much for congress actually doing something about it when the Democrats are the ones benefitting.

Creditors to Chrysler describe negotiations with the company and the Obama administration as “a farce,” saying the administration was bent on forcing their hands using hardball tactics and threats.

Conversations with administration officials left them expecting that they would be politically targeted, two participants in the negotiations said.

I wrote earlier about the thuggery the Obama administration has used against Chrysler’s creditors. The mainstream media has focused mainly on Perella Weinberg and the attorney. After Obama’s temper tantrum concerning these so-called trouble-makers who refused to cooperate, Perella Weinberg decided to go ahead and cooperate before Chrysler went to bankruptcy court. And Perella Weinberg’s officials claimed they were not intimidated.

Of course they would make that claim. But we now have other individuals representing other creditors who were intimidated. They spoke on condition of anonymity because, surprise, surprise, they are very much concerned about reprisals from the Obama administration.

The story now has more than one source, and mounting testimony — albeit understandably anonymous testimony, at least at this point — that the White House tried threatening senior creditors instead of doing their job in enforcing the law. Not only do they not realize that their responsibilities do not include building business plans for private enterprises, but also don’t include assuming the role of Michael Corleone and acting like organized-crime thugs. Actually, the way the White House made Obama sound, maybe Sonny Corleone is a better analogy … or perhaps Fredo.

I suspect the thuggery will only get worse as each day passes. Obama has shown no interest in remaining within any law that would serve to prevent him from doing whatever he wants.

Perhaps the most important election since last November — yeah, I know: that’s hardly a long time — will occur in California on Mrs Pico’s and my 30th wedding anniversary, May the 19th. Californians will go to the polls to vote on Proposition 1A, a complicated measure which, at its heart, authorizes a “temporary,” two-year state tax increase of $16 billion, and cap state spending increases.

The proposition is a complicated one, and several other budget measures, especially Proposition 1B, depend upon 1A’s passage by the voters.

George Will wrote an interesting article on this ubject, which was referenced by Donald Douglas:

No More California Dreaming

By George F. Will
Sunday, May 3, 2009

California’s increasingly severe and largely self-inflicted economic crisis will deepen May 19 if, as is probable and desirable, voters reject most of the ballot measures that were drafted as part of a “solution” to the state’s budget deficit. They would make matters worse. National economic revival is being impeded because one-eighth of the nation’s population lives in a state that is driving itself into permanent stagnation. California’s perennial boast — that it is the incubator of America’s future — now has an increasingly dark urgency.

Under Arnold Schwarzenegger, the best governor the states contiguous to California have ever had, people and businesses have been relocating to those states. For four consecutive years, more Americans have moved out of California than have moved in. California’s business costs are more than 20 percent higher than the average state’s. In the past decade, net out-migration of Americans has been 1.4 million. California is exporting talent while importing Mexico’s poverty. The latter is not California’s fault; the former is.

And here is the third paragraph, of extreme importance:

If, since 1990, state spending increases had been held to the inflation rate plus population growth, the state would have a $15 billion surplus instead of a $42 billion budget deficit, which is larger than the budgets of all but 10 states. Since 1990, the number of state employees has increased by more than a third. In Schwarzenegger’s less than six years as governor, per capita government spending, adjusted for inflation, has increased nearly 20 percent.

And that’s it. It has been said before that California leads the nation in domestic policy, that whatever is done first in the Golden State eventually becomes national policy. That California is a hotbed of liberal thought, with many, many voters openly claiming to be liberals, is undisputed. The ideas of liberalism, translated into public policy, have taken root in California. Thing is, now they have to pay for them.

And so we have Proposition 1A, with the state legislature asking the voters to approve significant, though supposedly temporary, tax increases, and a spending increase cap that would, again, supposedly, restrict the need for higher taxes further down the road. Will the voters approve?

Part of the problem for the ballot measures is the cynical — and probably justified — view that the tax increases will not be temporary and the spending caps will not be obeyed. There’s some innate weakness in taking judgements on the ballot results if a significant percentage of the population doesn’t believe that the proponents and the ballot language itself are truthful. Will a rejection of 1A mean that the voters are voting against tax increases, or will it mean that the voters think their elected leaders are a bunch of untrustworthy, lying scumbags?

On the bright side, it could mean both! 🙂

Mr Will concluded by saying that the Golden State has become our nations laboratory for liberalism — and that its budget failures prove the case for fiscal conservatism.¹ California’s problems will be more instructive to the rest of the nation if her citizens vote down the tax increases.

Perhaps Dr Douglas will disagree with me on this, and his opinion ought to be respected, given that he lives in California, and I do not, and he is a state employee there, but I’d bet that the complicated nuances behind the ballot propositions will not be generally well understood, or not be the real subjects of the voting. Rather, my guess is that the voters will be answering much a much simpler question: are you willing to approve higher taxes?

I’ve said it many times before: the voters have continually elected candidates who promised lower taxes: Ronald Reagan, the elder George Bush, Bill Clinton (even though he was lying through his scummy teeth), the younger George Bush, and even our current President, Barack Obama, ran on a promise of tax cuts, greater tax cuts than John McCain promised. (President Obama’s campaign website tax promises are still available on the internet.) Many of their opponents promised tax cuts as well: Al Gore ran on a huge tax cut platform, just one not as large as the one on which the younger Mr Bush ran.

There was, of course, one candidate who ran on an explicit promise to raise taxes. Walter Mondale did rather poorly in the 1984 election, winning just one state.

In California, probably our most liberal state, we’re about to see whether a liberal electorate is going to approve the tax increases to fund liberal policies enacted by government. It should send a very large message to our politicians: the voters either will approve higher taxes to support liberal programs, or they will prefer lower taxes.

Our friends on the left have been writing the political obituary of the Republican Party after our great losses in 2006 and 2008. That’s kind of like the wishful thinking Republicans engaged in concerning the demise of the Democratic Party in 2002 and 2004. But the message of fiscal conservatism which worked for the GOP in 1994, but was too-quickly abandoned, is about to get another test, a direct test from the voters of our most liberal state. If the voters do not approve the tax increases², the GOP has its message for 2010 and beyond: regardless of how people might like fancy new, compassionate programs, they prefer like fiscal conservatism and money in their own pockets more.
_______________________________
¹ – Paraphrasing here; I’ve already pushed “fair use” quotation limits.
² – The polls indicate that rejection is probable.

Best part is the carefully understated allusion to the Freddy’s Fashion Mart deaths, where Sharpton’s racism got folks killed. (I chose PBS because when even they admit about black vs lighter racism, it’s bad.)

Two thousand convicted men and women serve their sentences in a canvas incarceration compound.

The male chain gang, and the world’s first-ever female and juvenile chain gangs, clean streets, paint over graffiti, and bury the indigent in the county cemetery.

For example, he banned smoking, coffee, movies, pornographic magazines, and unrestricted TV in all jails. He has the cheapest meals in the U.S. too. The average meal costs about 15 cents, and inmates are fed only twice daily, to cut the labor costs of meal delivery. He even stopped serving them salt and pepper to save tax payers $20,000 a year.

Years ago, when the Sheriff learned that inmates were stealing jailhouse white boxers, Arpaio had all inmate underwear dyed pink for better inventory control. The same is true for the Sheriff’s handcuffs. When they started disappearing, he ordered pink handcuffs as a replacement. And later, when the Sheriff learned the calming, psychological effects of the color pink—sheets, towels, socks— everything inmates wear, except for the old-fashioned black and white striped uniform, were dyed pink.

Arpaio has started another controversial program, the website WWW.MCSO.org, so that all those arrested (about 300 per day) are recorded on the Sheriff’s website as they are booked and processed into jail. Just under a million hits daily come into the website, making it one of the most visible law enforcement sites on the World Wide Web.

The investigation focuses on Sheriff Joe Arpaio and dozens of officers under his command who were trained through the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Agreements of Cooperation in Communities to Enhance Safety and Security (ACCESS), which partners federal and local law enforcement to enforce immigration laws. (The Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement division is known popularly as ICE.)

Why’s he being investigated? Why, because four Dems and a nice selection of “activists groups”– like ACORN and the National Day Laborer Organizing Network. (cough, gee, really? A national organization of illegals dislikes immigration enforcement?)

Now, what kind of gross violations of civil rights has this man committed?
Why, this fiend has moved illegals who are in jail into a different section of the same style!

On February 4th, 2009, Joe went on a rampage. He rounded up immigrant detainees and forced them to march, shackled, to a segregated “tent city” surrounded by electric fences in the Arizona desert.

Oh…. Kay? Was he supposed to put them in a tent city that wasn’t separate from the citizen/resident population? That would make deportation a bit harder, but I wasn’t aware a of a civil right involving which identical section of a jail one is to be kept in. Must be one of those new fangled ones that keep showing up.

Arpaio said he would welcome Conyers and the other Washington lawmakers to inspect his operation.

“I want them to come here. I’ll even pay their airline ticket,” Arpaio said. “I want him to come here.

“I will take him to the tents. I will take him on these crime-suppression operations. I will fill him in on the truth. And then when he has his hearings, he’s going to have a lot of good background to talk about if he wants to do it truthfully.”

U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., chairman of the Judiciary Committee’s Constitution subcommittee, said Arpaio’s “malicious and vigilante practices are not immigration enforcement.”

On the contrary,” he said, “this is abuse of police power and a violation of federal law.”

But Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., another member of the committee, said Conyers routinely uses the panel in politically motivated ways.

“It’s hard for much to surprise me anymore, but this, in my judgment, is just another witch hunt by the liberals on the House Judiciary Committee,” Franks said.

Sounds like Rep Nadler already has his mind made up, and Rep. Franks is just standing there rolling his eyes.

Is this kind of bullying just a standard Dem tactic now, or something? What the heck happened to the party that was so awesome that my grandmother had a wall with “pictures of Jesus, the Pope and JFK” on it?

Granny Toots would take a stick to these idiots– or worse, scold them.

I think she would’ve gotten along great with Sheriff Joe, though. Most of my mom’s home town was first generation Irish and their families.
__________________________Cross Posted on Head Noises

In a very strongly-worded statement, McCarthy said he was going to have nothing to do with the propaganda Obama desires. It is obvious Obama already knows what he’s going to do and wanted a conservative lackey on this supposed “round table” for show. McCarthy cited federal law that Obama will be violating once Obama does what Obama has already decided to do. McCarthy further referenced the shenanigans going on now regarding previous attorneys who advised federal government officials. You know? All that criminalization of attorney advice the liberals are talking about? McCarthy wants nothing to do with that, either.

McCarthy was very wise to publish his letter of rejection. Now, his opinion on matters, the same opinion he would’ve given in the mock “round table” if he would’ve spoken — and he may have remained silent — are for the world to see. And Obama cannot hide behind the “everyone supports me” mumbo jumbo. But we all know he will still throw that line out there for public consumption.

Obama has tried to force lenders to take a weaker position than the law calls for while giving the union a much stronger position than the law calls for. And when those thuggery tactics failed, he resorted to other thuggery tactics, thuggery tactics he’s all too used to playing and everyone’s all too used to hearing. He lies, defames, smears those standing up to him.

Obama and his henchmen have complained that the attorneys representing the group of roughly 20 creditors who hold one billion dollars in Chrysler debt are refusing to name names. And why should they? You remember how ACORN showed up at people’s homes and vandalized homes and terrorized families over AIG. And the CFO of Freddie Mac had round-the-clock security around his home due to fears of the same sort of thugs showing up at his house.

It is painfully obvious that the Chicago-style political machine is very much active with the Obama crowd.

Share this:

Like this:

Perez Hilton forced a take-down of a YouTube video, claiming copyright violations due to 3 seconds of his video being used in a “fair use” manner. Following Patterico’s lead, I have copied the video and uploaded it myself.

Patterico suggested everyone copy and repost the video and so will I. We cannot allow people to silence by intimidation free speech.

“Our Country won’t go on forever, if we stay soft as we are now. There won’t
be any AMERICA because some foreign soldiery will invade us and take our
women and breed a hardier race!”
-Lt. Gen. Lewis B. “Chesty” Puller, USMC